you have to take into context what was available when Aperture was first released. There were no existing "workflow" programs. Those of us who were working professionally with a high volume of images, especially when shot in Raw format usually had a workflow of manually importing images from our cards into a folder hierarchy of our own invention, then we process do basic Raw processing in a Raw specific program ( Photoshop Raw processing at that time was pretty much a joke). We would save out the Raw conversions as Tiffs to Jpegs In a separate folder stack, then we would open images into Photoshop for any further processing and save the final images into a further separate folder stack. At the time Aperture was released, it was revolutionary and transformational. It was released a full year before the Beta of Lightroom hit the streets. Has Apple made some mistepps and errors during the gestation of Aperture? Of course. But you cannot deny it's initial impact on professional photography. And many famous professionals still use it, and Apple has continued to develop the program into an ever better product. It is also important to recognize that many important features that have been added to Lightroom over the years existed in Aperture way before tey showed up in Lightroom. For instance, Collections, soft Proofing, Video Capability, etc. so, just because thou personally found Aperture opaque, and not at all to your liking, it is incorrect to denigrate out as not being significant in the development of more capable Professional software. For sure, try out different software and use whatever you like best (Photoline?). But recognize that there are other software packages that thousands of other photographers find useful.

-- hide signature --

Only my opinion. It's worth what you paid for it. Your mileage may vary! ;-} www.dougwigton.com/